Quite possible; still, you're not saying that balts were dominant culture of Moscow lands in XIV century, right? It's Dmitry Donskoy times, just for the reference.
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
So, question stands - do you think Moscow was majorly baltic in Dmitry Donskoy times? Not some kind of forgotten enclaves, but majority?
You are asking again. I already answered that the majority were already Russian.
You want to bet:
1) I do not agree that the Hungarians lived in the Black Sea region in 769,
2) the Baltic provinces should be more by 769, at least as conquered provinces. Krivichi can be done with the Baltic States.. This would add dramatism.
3) Add the conquered Baltic provinces in the Volga Bulgaria
I did not understand the humor. Then, when I read Sedov.
So when do you. You were preparing to plant Balts only near the Baltic Sea during the Avar arrival.
The question of the Baltic peoples is not settled. Much was done by Toporov in linguistics and Sedov in archeology.
No humor. You're saying people around there was baltic - that's I do agree, they were, somewhere in history. In some moment of history Balts were replaced with Slavs, I believe it's historical fact. Question is, when it happened. Keep in mind, we're not speaking about "when did the the last person who was balt disappeared from region". We're speaking about majorities, right?
So it's more then one problem here.
1. You'll need some kind of strict criteria to separate Balts from Slavs, and Balts from Slavs who took some kind of material culture from Balts, and Balts from Slavs who separated from Balts some centuries before. You need to explain WHO do you call "Balts" and WHO are Slavs.
2. You'll need to present a date of balts stopped to be a majority, to the century.
3. You'll need to present exact localizations we're speaking about. What do you mean by "near the Baltic Sea"? Where is "near"?
I'm taking this maps - https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ef/East_europe_3-4cc.png; https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/07/East_europe_5-6cc.png - and consider them quite believable.
First map shows balts on the shore of Prypat, 620 km from the Baltic by shortest line (from Mazyr to Curonian Lagoon). If we take the liberal approach on hydronyms, it would be 800 to Kiev. Still, it's about 450 km from Kiev to Odessa, and Avars came by the shore of Black Sea. To came to places where Baltic hydronyms possibly presented, they needed to go hundreds kilometers to the north, and it's quite not understandable why would they. Kiev territory isn't exactly famous for furs and amber. If you take second, 6th century map, Balts are pushed even farther.
More then that. Baltic hydronyms means that baltic-speaking people lived there once upon a time. To date this living by hydronimics you need to have some other dating, like "ok, it's slavs who live here from *** year, so Balts should lived here before this year". Or "ok, baltic languages changed, so this name, by this changes, should be dated into *** century".
It's theoretically possible that Avars made this circle; we don't have some formal waybill, so they could deviate from the way into Carpathians. But didn't they had any business but running (on the horses!) through Eastern Europe forests? Balts weren't rich; they lived separated villages all over the territory. Still, there was population in place they conquer and raid, so if they want slaves they could get them from Slavs, Germans or Greek.
You gave the Slavic people too different cultures throughout Eastern Europe. Therefore, your version will always be criticized.
Here is another Danube version from the Russian scientific journal "Historical format" http://histformat.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/2018-1-2.pdf
Here is another Danube version from the Russian scientific journal "Historical format" http://histformat.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/2018-1-2.pdf
ON THE ORIGIN OF THE ETHNONYM «SLAVS»
Sergey Nazin School № 2000 22/6 The Kantemirovskaya Street, Moscow, 115522, Russia e-mail: sergnasin@yandeх.ru
According to the dominant theories today, the Slavs appeared somewhere to the north from the Carpathian Mountains, in the Vistula-Oder (Rusanova 1976; Sedov 1979; 2002) or
Pripyat-Dnieper region (Tretyakov 1982; Schukin 1997; Gavritukhin 2009) in as carriers of the Prague-type archaeological culture, which in the era
Of the Great Migration settled Eastern Europe and the Balkan peninsula.
The main disadvantage of such concepts is that they bypass the key question for Slavic self-consciousness, namely the conviction of the Slavs themselves in his arrival from the Danube. Attempts to link the "Danube legend" with the activities of St. Ciril and Methodius in the IX. unsubstantiated. The desire to see in her the memory of stay of the Slavs in the VI. on the lower Danube it is contrary to the fact that time years "and a number of other early sources derive the Slavs from the eastern foothills of the Alps, identify them with ancient Norik and Pannonians.
The purpose of this article is to once again critically review the evidence of history and linguistics about the early Slavs and to compare them with the prevailing views in modern science.
Where did the sklavins live?
The Gothic historian Jordanes writes: “The Slavs live from the city of Novietun and the lake, called Mursiansky, to Dunastra, and to the north - to Viskla; instead cities have swamps and forests. Anty is the strongest of both tribes - spread from Dunaster to Dunapra, where the Pontic Sea forms
bend; these rivers are separated from one another by a distance of many passages. ”
(Gettika, 35).
The description of the land of the Slavs is given on four cardinal points. Southern the border, apparently, was the border of the Byzantine Empire along the Danube, the east - r.
Dniester. The northern boundary was the Vistula River in its upper course. This follows from the fact that Jordan describes the Slavs as inhabitants of Scythia (Getika, 33-34), and the river
Wisla, "born in the Sarmatian Mountains, flows into the northern ocean with three arms mind Skandzy, demarcating Germany and Scythia "(Gettika, 17). In the west area
the settlement of the Slavins began "from the Mursian Lake and the city of Novietun" (a civitate Novietunense et laco qui appellatur Mursiano).
Jordanes indicates the position of the Mursinsky Lake when he writes: “Scythia border with the land of Germany down to the place where the river Istres is born and Mursian Lake (stagnus Morsianus) extends ”(Getika, 30). Clarify where “that place” is located, helps the news of “Natural History” by Pliny the Elder.
It says that, starting "in Germany", the Danube is called Istra "as just beginning to wash the shores of Illyria ”(Natural History, IV. 12 (79)). Junior contemporary of Pliny the Elder Tacitus reports that Germany is "separated from the Gauls, Retas and Pannonians by the rivers Rhine and Danube ... they [living in modern Czech markers] as it were, the advanced outpost of Germany, since its border - Danube ”(Germany, 1. 41-42).
We see that the eastern border of Germany on the Danube coincided with natural boundary between the Alpine lands and the Middle Danube lowland, which divides the upper and middle reaches of the Danube in the area of Vienna.
Lake Mursian can only be located on the historic border between “German” Austria and “Scythian” Hungary. Neyzidlersee (Hung. Fertő "swamp"). Prior to the start of reclamation works, this water body exceeded the size of Balaton, as it included the huge Khanshag bog (German: Waasen “swamp”).
The definition of the Mursian Lake at the same time as an “lake” (lacus) and the “standing pond” (stagnum) is explained by its impressive size and extremely small — on average, about a meter — Neusiedlersee depth. Probably, Jordanes called this lake Mursian by the name of the neighboring city Murcella on the Marcal River (Hungarian Marcaly <Mursella). In the place of Murcella lies the modern village of Moritzida (Hung. Mórichida). This name means "bridge across [the river] Muretz." The situation on the historical border of Germany and Hungary, and the neighborhood with a bunch of toponyms and hydronyms on the “Mur” make identification of the Mursian Lake with the modern Neusiedlersee the only possible one. Remoteness from the border with "Germany" and the lack of a real lake in the vicinity makes it absolutely incredible placement of the Mursian Lake on the site of the ancient swamp Hiulca palus near the cities of Murcia (present-day Osijek) and Murcella (present-day Petrievtsi) at the confluence Drava in the Danube (Skrzhinskaya 1957: 6).
The identification of Lake Mursian with Lake Balaton (Skrzhinskaya 1957: 16). Jordanes mentions two lakes: Mursiansky and Pelso (lacum Pelsois; lacum Pelsodis: Getika, 268, 274), the latter clearly located in Pannonia. In the Middle Danube, there are only two reservoirs that deserve the name of the lake (him. See) - Fertё (Neusiedlersee) and Balaton (Plattensee). Obviously, these are the two Jordan lakes, the Mursian and the Pelso, respectively. Any other explanations will look like obvious violence against geography of a well-known ancient region.
As for Novietun, two cities with this name are known in the Danube region (Celt. "New City") - modern Isaccea at the mouth of the Danube and Drnovo at the confluence of the r. Krka in Sava. There are large lakes and estuaries near Isakchi, but since there are no names like Mursa, Mūrsella or Muretsa in those places, identifying them with Mursian Lake will be complete arbitrariness. In addition, the border of Scythia and Germany cannot be placed in the lower Danube, and the usual in such cases reservation about vague geographical representations of the ancients does not help here. The city of Noviodun-Drnovo, on the contrary, fully corresponds to the description of Jordanes. If you look at the map, we will see that the Neusiedlersee – Drnovo line coincides with the natural boundary (300 m above sea level) between the eastern Alps and the Middle Danube lowland (see Fig. 1). This is the western border of the settlement of "sklavins", which in the first half of the 6th century. lived from the Alps in the west to the Dniester in the east and from the upper Vistula in the north to the Byzantine border on the Danube in the south, occupying the entire Carpathian Basin, including the Hungarian Danube (antique Pannonia).
Early localization "Sklavins" in Pannonia confirmed the news of Procopius. About 512 G. fled from the Danube, the Heruls "are sequentially passed through all the Slavic tribes, and then, passing through vast desert region, made up of the so-called warnow. After they went through the tribes of the Danes Here... they came to the ocean, boarded ships, landed on the Isle of Fula and stayed there" (the War with the Goths, II. 15. 2-4).
The Heruls could not come back to Scandinavia through the Slavic lands on the lower Danube and Dniester – for this they would have to give an inexplicable detour around the outer side of the Carpathians. The direct route North through the Moravian gate would have led the Heruli in Silesia. Living here in the beginning of VI century numerous Slavic tribes, which one can "get one another" is impossible: the extreme Western monuments of the early Slavic Prague culture at that time did not go to the West of the Vistula Kazanski 1999: 58) (Fig. 2A).
Fig. 1. The western boundary of the settlement of the Slavins in Jordanes
Most likely, the Heruls didn’t go north immediately after the defeat from Lombards, as can be understood by literally reading Procopius, and after collisions with Gepids and Byzantines in the Sirmium region. The shortest road to the Varnas, which Prokopy most likely refers to as the Saxons by this name, went westward through the completely devastated land “where rugi lived in ancient times”, that is, modern Austria (Czech Rakusy). The geruls were already trying to settle there, but they were forced to go south to the region of Sirmium and Singiduna, fleeing hunger (War of the Goths, II. 14. 24-25). Having crossed from there to the north bank of the Danube, they could get to the Thuringians, who, before their defeat by the Franks in 531, owned Zareinian Germany. The title “The Law of Angles and Varins, Whose are the Thuringes” (Lex Angliorum Werinorum hos est Thuringorum) confirms the entry of Varnas into the ephemeral Thuringian state. The path of the Heruli can be restored as follows: the Sirmium region is the land of the “Sklavins” (Pannonia and East Norik) - a huge desert land left by rugami (Austria) - the land of the Varnas (possession of Thuringian kings) - Danish land (Jutland) (Fig. 2b).
Fig. 2a Borders of settlement of Sclavs and Anti (orange) and the border between Germany and Scythia (green) over Jordanes;
Figure 2b. Possible ways of Heruls to Scandinavia.
Who are the Anti?
We see that Jordan represented the area of settlement of the Slavins in the first half of VI. in the form of a regular geometric figure that occupies all space of the Carpathian basin. If you compare this area with the range early Slavic monuments of Prague culture in the first half of the 6th century. we can easily see that they generally lie outside the distribution of the Jordanian “Sklavins”. This means that the famous Prague culture VI-VII centuries. cannot be identified with the proper “Slavs” (sklavins).
Jordanes writes: “Between these rivers lies Dacia, which, like crowns shield the Alps. On the left of their slope, going down to the north, starting from the birthplace of the Vistula River, a populous tribe of Venets settled on immense spaces. Although their names are now changing according to different genera and localities, they are mostly called claves and antes ”(Getika, 34). It is obvious that the area of the settlement of the Veneti to the east of the Carpathians and the Vistula fully coincides with the early Prague range.
The messages of Jordanes contain a certain contradiction. Insofar as since the Venets are a collection of Sclavins and Anti, then from the “immeasurable spaces” occupied by the Veneti, the share of Sclavins remains a narrow strip of land between the Carpathians and the Dniester. It turns out that the remaining and, moreover, most Venetian region will get living between the Dniester and the Dnieper Anti. At the same time, most of the range of Slavins in the Carpathian Basin (see above) will be located outside the region of the Venets. Thus, in essence, only Anti are turned out to be Venets. The inclusion of Sklavins in their composition is due, firstly, to kinship with the Anti (War of the Goths, III. 14. 26-27, 29), and secondly, the Gothic origin of Jordanes, which (the only one of all modern Byzantine writers!) knew the Germanic name of the Slavs - “Vends”, which used as a generic term. In this regard, I would like to clarify the relationship between the ethnonyms Veneti and Anti. Since the Anti by their name are different from the Sclavins, that is, the "Slavs", the ethnonym Anti is considered non-Slavic by origin and elevates it to the hypothetical name of the Slavs from foreign neighbors (Trubachev 2003: 98). At the same time, it is completely overlooked that the Greek word Ἄνται "Anti" conveyed the Slavic (!) self-name of this people. Obviously, the Antes could not call themselves "Slavs". In this case, the well-known false Hilvudy (an ant in origin) could not express a Slavonic simple thought: "I am an Ant, not a Sklavin." And on the contrary, the Sklavins themselves should have had a special Slavic ethnonym for designating the Anti.
The most complete list of Slavic tribes is contained in the "Tale bigon years". Some names - Slavs, Dregovichi, North - already known from the VI-VII centuries. It is impossible to assume that the Slavic self-name of the Antes, which in the VI. enjoyed half (!) of all Slavs of that time completely disappeared from the Slavic ethnic nomenclature. If the Greek word Σκλάβηνοι reflects the self-name “not, then the Greek Ἄνται must correspond to the name of another chronicle of the tribe.
The Slavic prototype of the ethnonym Ἄνται can be restored on the basis of the name chronicles Vyatichi (vѧtichi, * vęt-itji). The initial Slavic "in" corresponds to the Greek aspiration (psilia): glory. * vers "veres (k)" - Greek ἐρείκη. In the same way, the initial sound of v- in the name of the Adriatic Venets was transmitted in Greek: Veneti> Ἐνετοί (Herodotus, I. 196), Ἐνετικοί (Konstantin Bagryanonny, 27. (38)). Nasal sound * ę (ѧ) in the Slavic language in the VI. was not yet (Shevelov 1964: 328, Anikin, Ivanov 2014: 254). It developed later from the syllable * en, which was naturally transmitted by the Greek αν: lat. сalendae> grech. καλάνδαι. The Greek -αι and Latin - es passed to the early Slavic ending of the plural. Its appearance can be restored on the basis of Lithuanian toponyms in the plural form Trakai / Polish. Troki and lit. Šlovėnai / dr. Rus. in other words (here the chronicle term “inhabitants of Gotland”). Thus, the self ants in the VI. can be reconstructed in as * ventai / * ventoi. Phonetic processes VII-IX centuries. led to the fact that the word has become difficult to pronounce * vętě / * vęti, which led to the appearance of the suffixed variant "Vyatichi".
There is no doubt that the name Vyatichi goes back to the name mentioned in the monuments of I-II centuries. Eastern European Wends (Anikin, Ivanov 2014: 254). The fact that earlier non-Slavic tribes in Italy and Gaul are called Venetians does not have anything to do with the ethnicity of the Slavic Venets. The ethnonym Γερμάνιοι was first mentioned by Herodot in the 5th century. BC. in the list of Persian tribes (Herodotus, I. 125). Plinius the Elder calls the Iberian tribe of the Oretans Germans (Oretani qui et Germani vocantur) (Natural History, III. 29). It would not occur to anyone on the basis of these examples to question the linguistic affiliation of the Germans Caesar and Tacitus.
Building the name of the Anti to the Indo-Iranian root * ant- “end, border”, from which the name “Ukraine” allegedly originated (Basmer I: 376) is an obvious misunderstanding. The hypothetical * ant- "Anti" can really be conveyed by the Greek Ἄνται - the trouble is that the Anti were not Greeks, but Slavs. On Slavic soil, the syllable * an could turn only into the nasal * ǫ (ѫ) “us big”. Such an etymology could be considered only if there is a chronicle of the tribe "(c) uchi" (* ǫtitji). The full identity of the Veneti and the Ants can be confirmed with the news of the defeat of the Ants by the Gothic King Vinitar at some point in the end of the 4th c. (Gettika, 245-246). The word "Vinitarium" is the usual Germanic ethnonym in -ari, like vidyvaria (Getika, 36) or bauvariya (bavar). A similar name Vandalaria, that is, "vandal" wore the grandfather of Theodoric the Great. Obviously, the nickname Vinitarium simply means “Venet” and, let us recall domestic “Afghan warriors”, was given by the ethnic name of the enemies, in the battles with which this king became famous.
Since he fought the Anti, we can conclude that Goths IV c. called them "Vinitaria." Thus, the ants IV - early VII centuries. It should be considered the direct descendants of Eastern European Veneds of the I-III centuries, the Slavic self-name of which survived to historical time in the name of the chroniclers of the Vyatichi. So, if the continuity between Wends and Anti is not subject to doubt, then the question of the identity of the Veneti and the "Sklavins" must be given a uniquely negative answer. Slaves and venets / antes are two different, albeit related peoples. The first in the mass occupied the inner part of the Carpathian depression up to the eastern foothills of the Alps, the second - the land stretching to the northeast from the Carpathians.
What is the pre-Slavic language?
Proto-Slavic or pan-Slavic was a language with an open syllable, in which all the words ended in a vowel, which reflected the pre-revolutionary Russian spelling with the sign "ъ." This is the fundamental difference.
Proto-Slavic language from the Baltic, which preserved the ancient state of the language with a closed syllable: lit. Vilnius and Rus. Vilna the tendency to open syllable is alien to the Indo-European structure of speech, the only exception was the Proto-Romanian language, in which Latin closed syllables fell: Latin. lupus> ital. lupo, isp. lobo, etc.
This circumstance, as well as the complete coincidence of the Pro-Slavic and Pra-Romanesque phonetics and a number of other striking convergences indicate that Pre-Slavic language was formed due to the strongest influence of folk Latin on the archaic Indo-European dialect of the Slav ancestors (Ivanov 1989: 26). The Germanic languages, despite the millennial neighborhood with the Latin language, did not experience anything of the kind, from which it follows that the Proto-Slavic language could become the language of an open syllable only under the conditions of Roman Slavic bilingualism in the Roman Empire.
Where and when could this interaction take place? Traditionally his by the time of the migration of the Slavs to the Balkan Peninsula, where they faced with the Eastern Romance population - the ancestors of the modern Romanians. Stories are known examples of a complete change in the initial language system under the influence of a more powerful and developed language. So Anglo-Saxon turned into modern English under the influence of French in a very short period of time from 1066 to the end of the XV century. (Middle English period).
Unlike the Anglo-Saxons, the Slavs came to the Balkans as conquerors. The local Vlach and Albanian populations were pushed into the mountains and the first references to it appeared only in the sources of the X-XI centuries. The Romanian language experienced the strongest impact of the Slavic language: a huge layer of vocabulary was borrowed (41% of A. Chikhaki’s dictionary, 1879), including the most frequent word in the spoken word “yes”. Slavic origin has the main part of the social and agricultural terminology of the Romanian language, the original Latin vocabulary is almost completely supplanted from the description of the most important emotional and psychological qualities of a person. Only the Romanian pastoral vocabulary and words relating mainly to the “biological” side of human life activity are unique. Under the influence of the Slavic, the syntax, phonetics and morphology of the Romanian language also significantly changed.
Under these conditions, the opposite and most important, the simultaneous impact of the Romanlanguage into Slavic, turned it into a language with open syllables, is unlikely. For example, the influence of the Anglo-Norman language on the Anglo-Saxon language, comparable to the influence of the Slavic language on the Romanian, was emphasized one-sided. The same can be assumed in the case of the Slavs and Romanians. Slavonic could not experience the strongest Romanesque influence due to the “cultural” superiority of the autochthonous Romanesque population over the Slavic conquerors, since the Roman cities in the Balkans were destroyed with the arrival of the Slavs, the “cultural” layer of the population died or fled, and the remaining population retreated to the mountains. The Slavs who occupied the best lands in the valleys of the Balkan Peninsula (dominated by Slavonic toponymy and hydronymy) had no reason to learn the language of Albanian and “Vlachian” pastoralists, as the Anglo-Saxons had not, push aside Vlachs (wealh, Welsh) of Britain in the barren mountains of Wales and Scotland.
The influence of the Romance language on the Slavic, which led to the transformation his language with an open syllable took place in the conditions of Slavic-Romanesque
bilingualism. This interaction was supposed to occur at full the predominance of Romanesque speech and the Romanesque population over the Slavs. In the VI-VII centuries. this was impossible, but the ethnic memory of the Slavs retained a very definite idea of the domination of the “Volokhs”, which in fact was considered the beginning of its history: “Volokh bo found on the Slovenes on the Danube, and is the oldest in them and forces them” (Tale 1950: 11).
This event can not be timed to the wars of the Slavs and Byzantines in the lower Danube (Machinsky 1981: 12), since this confrontation ended in victory Slavs, nor to the defeat of the Avars Kaganate by the Franks (Petrukhin 1996), since the invasion of the Volokhs in the annals takes place before the arrival of the Obar “Avar”. Therefore, the chronicle story of the Volokh invasion of the Danube Slavs should be considered a description of the Roman conquest and domination (“the most seducing and forcing them”) on the Middle Danube.
From the foregoing it follows that having been under the strongest influence Late Latin, the formation of Slavic as a language with an open syllable couldoccur only on the territory of the Roman provinces in the Middle Danube before the beginning of the great migration of peoples.
What does the name "Slavs" mean?
The connection of the name * slověne "Slavs" with the "Slovo" "word" is intuitive. Doubts according to which the suffix -ѣne / -yane usually serves to form place names should not be taken into account. On the Slavic soil, where the Polians model is Polish, the Drevlyans are Derevo wooden, the Volzhans are Volga, a natural “Slavs” would be expected to be “Slavic”. That is why the name of the Slavs can not be compared with the name of the Lithuanian village Shlavenai (Šlavėnai) on the river. Šlavė and deduce from the name of a certain river (Vasmer III: 666; Schramm 1997: 71-73). “Slavs” is not a geographical name.
It is almost generally accepted that in the name of "Slavs", that is, "speaking", Slavs they separated themselves from the "mute" neighbors who did not understand the Slavic language. Hence the ethnonym "Nemets" "mute" (Fasmer III: 62). But the word “Nemets” never had such an “all-encompassing” meaning. The Slavs designated by this name only the western neighbors - the Germans - and even then not all. Constantine Bagryanorodnyy calls Bavars only “Nemets” (Νεμίτζιοι) (On Ceremonies, II, 48). Hungarians, who borrowed the ethnonym német from the Slavs, called it so only the inhabitants of southern Germany (Latin teutones), who spoke High German. The carriers of the Low German dialects were called “Saxons” (szász / saxones), while both “nations” could live within the same of the same city (Vinogradov, Melnikova, Shusharin 1989: 149).
Thus, the “Nemets” was originally not the designation of all “non-Slavs”, but a narrow-tribe name, which can be clearly seen from the chronicle list. “Afetovo bo and that knee: Varanasians, Svei, Urman, Goth, Russia, Agnes, Galicans, Volykhva, Romans, Nmtsi, Korlyazi, Venѣditsi, Fryagov and others, too, from west to midday and come down to eat with my hamovs, and descend to our hams, and from time to time from west to noon and come together for a family of hams, and descend to be in a family of hams and descend from west to mid-afternoon and come together to eat with our hams. 1950: 10). The word "Nemets" is difficult to consider the original Slavic because of the "strange" stress. It is obvious to anyone who speaks Russian that a "слепой" “blind man” cannot be a "слéпцем", a «глупый» – «глýпцем»“stupid”, a «хромой» – «хрóмцем» "lame". The origin of the ethnonym “Nemets” from the Slavic word "nemoi" “mute” is therefore completely excluded. It should be considered as borrowing from the Celtic languages (AA Shakhmatov by: Fasmer III: 62), where nemed means a free full member of a tribe, admitted to a tribal cult, sent by druids (literally "woody") in sacred groves (Greek νέμος "forest", lat. nemus, -oris "grove") (Simone 1984; Shkunayev 1989: 45, 48-49). From here comes the names of one of the waves of the conquerors of Ireland - “the people of Nemed” and the Gallic tribe of Nemetes near modern Speyer (Noviomagus Nemetum).
If the opposition of "talking" Slavs and "mute" Germans turned out to be imaginary, then how to explain the appearance of the name with the meaning "speaking understandable"? An ethnonym with such a meaning is completely unusual, since it refers to the opposition of people and animals (the speakers are wordless), while the archaic ethnic names have the meaning of “real” and not “speaking” person ”(Nikonov: 15).
In Europe, there are only three peoples whose self-name means “people who speak a clear language”: these are Slavs, Albanians (shqiptarët) and Basques (euskaldunak). The typology of these names, which became known relatively late, suggests the same reason for their appearance. It lies on the surface. Albanians and Basques are linguistic relics - remnants of the autochthonous population of the Balkan and Iberian Peninsula, which miraculously escaped Romanization. Therefore, the ethnonyms euskaldunak and shqiptarët could arise only in the conditions of hostile coexistence of the Romans and the natives within the borders of the Roman Empire.
In later times, the opposition of the Romanesque and the unromanized population of the provinces would have no meaning. It is impossible to refer the occurrence of self-names of Albanians and Basques to even later time. In medieval Spain, the originality of the Basques was protected by special privileges (fueros). The consequence of Turkish domination could be Islamization of the Albanians, but in the “baptismal state” there was nothing like the processes of language assimilation that took place in the Roman Empire.
It has already been said that Slavic, as the language of an open syllable, could develop only in the context of Roman-Pra-Slavic bilingualism. Sense Identity
the self-designation of the Slavs, Albanians and Basques confirms that the ethnonym * slověne arose among the provincial population of the Roman Empire, who, by virtue of some
Reasons managed to keep their language.
Where was the Slavic ethnic center?
The statement that the “Slavs” originated in the Roman Empire looks like a paradox, but in fact it is not. Usually Slavic ethnogenesis is as follows. Toward the middle of the 1st millennium AD in a limited area to the north of the Carpathians appears Prague archaeological culture, the carriers of which were the first Slavs. Then, for a number of reasons, the Slavic population begins to grow dramatically, expand its territory and number, including through the mass assimilation of the foreign-speaking population. The overgrown Slavic community is divided into separate nations, and the name of the Slavs It remains as a local self-name only on the periphery, where the Slavic population comes into contact with the foreign.
This "biblical" picture of the multiplied "like sand of the sea" Slavs has little to do with the actual ethnogenetic processes that take place in exactly the opposite way. First, a certain community arises that differs from its kindred language by its name, for example, “Romans” or “Turks”. Then this community establishes dominance (or primacy) within its own linguistic environment, assimilation of a foreign language population is possible, but does not play a special role. The new name is assimilated by kindred tribes as a generic, but continues to exist as a “local” or the “tribal” name of the original collective, which becomes the center of the ethnic community formed. The death of this center is equivalent to the arrest of the human heart and leads to an irreversible disintegration of ethnic unity and the beginning of a new ethnogenetic process.
The ethnogenesis of the ancient Russian people can be considered a classic example. At the end of the ninth century. "Russian" Prince Oleg at the head of the unification of a number of northern tribes occupies Kiev - the main city in the "Polish land". The change of dynasty and the arrival of numerous newcomers contribute to the assimilation of self-names by the Polians "Russian". Based on the population of the "Russian land" (in fact, on the field), the Russian princes are subjugated by other Slavic tribes. In the XI-XII centuries. tribes give way places to urban lands, but the opposition of the “Russian land” in the Dnieper region and the “Russian” people inhabiting it to the Russian population of other lands is fully preserved. Despite the constant strife, "Rus" retains its value as the center of Russia - any significant Prince wants to have a city there. The reason for the collapse of the (ancient) Russian ethnos was not the notorious “fragmentation”, but the death of the “Russian land” in the Dnieper region literally erased by the Tatars from the face of the earth.
If we approach the question of the origin of the Slavs from this point of view, we will see that the ethnic center of the Slavs is in the western part of the Middle East.The Danube River is there, from where the Tale of Bygone Years brings the Slavs. It is here that Slavic peoples live, using the name of "Slavs" as self-designation: Slovenes, Slovaks and Croats of the Kaykava dialect.
It is erroneous to assert that the ethnonym "Slavs" has been preserved on the periphery of Slavism, in the neighborhood or in the environment of a foreign-speaking population. The Lausitz Serbs, the most characteristic people in this respect, have never used the Slavs self-name as a “tribal” self-name. With another hand, all the Danube "Slavs", like the Russians, Ukrainians and Belarusians, became independent peoples relatively recently.
Today the Kaykava dialect is much closer to the Slovenian language than to the Croatian literary language that has developed on the basis of the Stockvian dialect.
The central Slovak dialect is sharply separated from the western and eastern Slovak dialect, like all Western Slavic languages in general, with its own “Yugoslav Slavonic” peculiarities, bringing him primarily to the Slovenian and Kaikawa (Smirnov 1989: 247).
In the Middle Ages, the Hungarians did not make a difference between the Slavs of the Middle Danube using the name "Slavs" as the self-name. They called Slovaks, Slovenes and the Kaykava population of Slavonia one and the same word tót (h), which corresponded to the Latin sclavus. Other Slavs were known to Hungarians under their own names: orosz “Russian”, lengyel “Polish”, cseh “Czech”, marót “Moravec”, horvát “Croatian”, bolgár “Bulgarians”, rác “Serb”. The Hungarians never confused them with the “Slavs” and did not call them the word tót (h). On the other hand, the ethnonym "tots" was never used to designate "Slavs in general" (Shusharin 1997: 230).
The evidence of the archaic Hungarian ethnonymy about the existence of a special people of "Slavs" is confirmed by the "Tale of Bygone Years". "Be one language
Slovѣnska: [1] slovѣne, ilk sѣdyaha according to Dunaevi, their priyash eels, [2] and morava, [3] and chesi, [4] and lyakhov, [5] and the glade, nowadays Rus'. Obviously, “the words, ilk sѣdyahu according to Dunaevi” are the very Hungarian “tots” (“their priyasha eels”) - the ancestors of the Slovaks, Slovenes and Slavonians, who on the eve of the Hungarian invasion represented a single people with a special dialect (Chelim 1988) .
The origin of the Hungarian ethnonym tót (h) (plural h. Tót (h) ok) "(Danube) Slavs" is most plausibly explained from the Turkic tat, which the nomads called the conquered agricultural population (Shusharin 1997: 262).
The attitude of the "Turks" (as the Byzantines called Hungarians) to "tats" was reflected in the sayings tatsiz Turk Bulmaz, Bashiz Burk Bulmaz "there is no Turk without tat, no cap
without a head "(Türk.) and a kasa nem etel, a tot nem ember" porridge is not food, that (ie, Slav) is not a person "(Hungarian).
So, the chronicle "land of Slovka" on the middle Danube had for the Slavic world the same meaning as the "Russian land" in the Dnieper region for the rest of Russia. It was from here that Slavic self-consciousness spread to peripheral Slavic tribes: Poles, fields, Vyatichi, etc. This process should not be confused with the resettlement of "Slavs in general", although the resettlement of the "Slavs" proper from the Danube also took place - we are talking about Pomorians and Ilmenes Slovens.
Important cultural and linguistic impulses emanated from the Middle Danube region (Kurkina 1993: 38; Trubachev 2003: 85), which ensured the unity of the Slavs at the time of St.. Cyril and Methodius. The Hungarian conquest led to the death of the “Slavic land” on the Danube. The best part of it - the Hungarian Danube - was inhabited by the Hungarians, and the actual “Slavic” population was preserved only in the Alps, Tatras and between the rivers Sava and Drava. There it turned into Slovaks, Slovenes and Croatians-Kaykavts (Slavonic). The death of the Slavic ethnic nucleus led to the disintegration of the Slavs in the southern, western and eastern.
From whom do the “Slavs” come?
In order to better understand the mechanism of the emergence of "Slavs", one should once again list the conclusions made above. "Slavs" (sklavinami) in the VI. only that part of the then Slavs was named, which inhabited the Carpathian Basin. Proto-Slavic language with open syllables was formed under the strong influence of late Latin on the territory of the Roman Empire even before the Slavs migrated to the Balkans. The ethnonym "Slavs" could appear only among the provincial unromanized population. Ethnic center
Slavs, where they lived actually "Slavs", was the western part of the Middle Danube region - the land of the Roman provinces of Pannonia and Norik (eastern). These conclusions
fully confirm the authenticity of the early Slavic tradition about the Danube ancestral homeland of the Slavs.
Of course, this tradition cannot be regarded as originally “pan-Slavic”. The Danube legend relates only to the Sklavins, not the Venets (Ants), only to the Danube “Slavs”, and not the Poles or Vyatchians. The latter were not Danube natives, and their own traditions remained to us unknown. Therefore, I would like to draw the reader’s attention to the fact that all of the following applies only to the ancestors of Slovaks, Slovenes and Croats Kaikavians (as well as Ilmen words and Pomors Slovinians).
The presence of the Slavic autochthonous population, which significantly prevailed over other ethnic elements on the Middle Danube, can based on the news of Priska Paninsky, who visited Attila’s bid in the middle of the 5th century, long before the first mention of the name of the Slavs. Priscus calls Attila’s subjects are Scythians and reports that “in representing a mixed tribe, Scythians, apart from their barbaric language, can easily learn Gunish or Gothic, as well as Avsonian, if any of them have intercourse with the Romans, but few of them speak Hellenic besides the captives taken away from Thrace and the Illyrian coast ”(Code I: 87). Prisk opposes "Scythians" and "Goths" and uses the name "Royal Scythians" as a synonym for the word "Huns", and reports that the latter do not engage in agriculture (Prisk, 1, 14.39).
It is obvious that, in addition to the "royal Scythians", there were Scythians "non-royal", who, unlike the former, were dependent farmers, that is, "tatami" of the Huns (Set I: 87) These were the “mixed
Scythians "(literally ζύγκλιδες" washed up by the waves "(Code I: 94)), who spoke in" their barbarous language "different from Hun, Gothic, Latin (Avson) and
Greek The native words strava, μέδος, κάμον, Tisia with transparent Slavic etymologies make it possible to judge the nature of this language (Gindin 1981).
Name p. Tisza, which in ancient times was known exclusively as Patiscus (Pathiscus, Πάθισο вообще) in general, could only arise on Slavic soil, where
The name Patisse, perceived as "Potie," was transformed into Tisa (Gindin 1981: 64-66). Needless to say, the name of the largest tributary of the Danube in the Slavic form could not come into use already in the middle of the 5th century, if the Slavic population were not accounted for the vast majority in the state of Attila.
Slavic "mixed Scythians" who lived in the Middle Danube were direct descendants of the provincial population of the Roman province of Pannonia. This allows you to judge the name of the drink from the barley, which they treated the Priscus servants. The word κάμον or camum was a drink like the Egyptian ziton or Celtic Kervisia, that is, beer (κερβησία, cervesa) (Code I: 94).
Tacitus reports that the wasp tribe living in Germany spoke Pannonian, which was different from both Germanic and Celtic (Cotinos Gallica, Osos Pannonica lingua coarguit non esse Germanos) (Germany, 43). Tacitus also reports that the wasps were a branch of the Pannonian tribe of the Euravisks (Sed utrum Aravisci in Pannonia ab Osis, Germanorum natione, an Osi ab Araviscis in Germania commigraverint, cum eodem adhuc sermone institutis moribus utantur, incertum) (Germany, Germany) (Germany, Germany), Germany, Germany, Germany, Germany (Germany), Germany, ethereutis moribus utantur, inertum (Germany) (Germany)
The only thing that can be said about the Pannonian language is that it was Indo-European (Tokhtasiev 1998: 30). The toponymy and material culture of Pannonia differ from those in the western part of the Balkan Peninsula, from which it can be concluded that the Pannonians and Illyrians were different in language and origin of nations (Praistoria V: 755). The following examples point to the extreme proximity of the Pannonian and Proto-Slavic languages.
First, the name of the Pannon beer κάμον or camum is reliably explained only from the praslav. * Kom "com", from where Serb. Kommina "grape pomace" and kȍminjak "grape moonshine" (Code I: 92; Essy X: 173, 179). Secondly, we are talking about the names of the lake Pelso “reach”, the Oseriates “lake” tribe and the Bustricius “Bistrica” river in Pannonia, as well as the name of the god in the inscription from Intercis in Pannony DoBRATI. EUTICER. SER (vus). DE (dit) “Evtikhiy the slave consecrated to God the Shame” (Trubachev 2003: 109). Thirdly, the names of the tribes living in Pannonia Eravisks, Tauris and Skordisks end with the characteristic suffix -sk-, which is represented in the Baltic, Germanic and Slavic languages, but is completely absent in the Celtic and in the Illyrian ethnonymy of the western part Balkan (Porzig 2003: 297). Fourthly, the leader of the Pannonnian uprising against Rome (6-9 years) Baton (Batho, - nis) bore the same name as the Slavic prince of the XI century. Konstantin Bodin (Βοδίνῳ at Skylitsa; Βοδίνου at Anna Komnina).
About the stay of the linguistic ancestors of the Slavs in Pannonia at the end of the 1st millennium BC This is evidenced by the fact that the Slavic language shares with the language of the Adriatic Veneti an important lexical innovation - the word "young." In other Indo-European languages (with the exception of Prussian), this word retained the original Indo-European meaning "soft, gentle." The Venetian inscriptions contain personal names corresponding to the Yugoslavian Mladen, Mladenka (Porzig 2003: 221). This should also include the Venetian Tergeste, Lat. Tergestum (Trieste) etymologically close pier. * tъržišče "Torzhische".
Thus, it is safe to say that the chronicles of the “words of the Danube”, they are also the Hungarian “tots” (tót (h) ok, Sclavi) - the ancestors of modern Slovaks, Slovenes and Croatian Kaikavians - are direct descendants of the ancient Pannonians.
How and when did the ethnonym "Slavs" appear?
Since the name of the Slavs could not have appeared before the Roman conquest of the Danube, we cannot mechanically identify Pannonians of the 1st and 2nd centuries. with
native speakers * slověne. The Slavs, like the Albanians and the Basques, are a new growth irreducible to the ancient tribes. Such a new community really develops in the Roman provinces on the Danube - we are talking about the so-called "Illyricians".
C III. ne "The army of the Illyricians" (exercitus Illyricianum) began to be called the Roman troops on the Danube. Since the time of Adrian (117-138), they settled in permanent camps, and during the rule of Septimius Severus (193-212) their personnel, recruited from the local non-Romanized population, finally lost the original Italian (i.e. Roman) character (Bannikov 2013: 60, 64). In 235, the “Illyricians”, who served as the main support of the Northern dynasty, killed its last representative, Alexander, and erected on their imperial throne henchman - the first "soldier emperor" Maximin Thracian. This event was evidence of the final formation of a new ethnic community, opposed to the "Romans". This is also indicated by the coins of the soldier emperors with the provocative legend GENIVS EXERC (itus) ILLVRICIANI “the genius of the Illyrian army” instead of the usual GENIUS POPULI ROMANI “the genius of the Roman people”.
The early Slavic borrowings from Latin have as their source the language of the Roman military camp: * ščitъ - scutum "shield", * kladivo - gladius "sword", * sekyra - sekuris "ax", * trǫba - tromba "war pipe", * kъmětъ - соmes , * kalika - caliga "soldier's boot", * kostr - castrum "military camp", * val - - vallum "palisade", * kobyla - caballus "paddle (cavalry) horse", * vьlbǫd ъ - elephans (-ntis) "(combat ) elephant ", * golǫb - сolumbus" (postal) pigeon ". The source of these borrowings was soldier Latin no later than the 3rd century, since
In the following centuries, the gladiator sword fell out of use and was replaced by spata, and the word columbus was completely suppressed from the Latin word palumbus - palomba "dove".
The Roman army on the Danube border was made up of very different ethnic elements, but it was the Pannonians who formed the basis and it is not surprising that it was their language - Pannonica lingua - and not Latin that became the language of the military camp of the Danube provinces. Stories are well known examples of this kind. The language of communication of the Great Mogul army was the language "Urdu" - literally "military", "camp", which was formed on the basis of indigenous people of india. In Portuguese Brazil until the end of the XVIII century. The language of communication was the so-called língua geral paulista, which was formed on the basis of the Guaraní language, which was spoken by Banderanta soldiers from São Paulo.
Probably, the name "Slavs" was originally a tribal designation of the entire provincial population of the Danube, using the military "word", and then, in the era of open struggle of Illyria and Italy in the era of the "III century crisis," became ethnic self-designation. Proto-Slavic ethnonyms * slověne and * volsi (sg. * volxá) will then correspond to the Latin Illyricianes and Romani. In this connection, the combination of Slavs - Slavic, impossible in Slavic, but fully corresponding to borrowed Christians - Christian, Armenians - Armenian, Samaritan - Samaritan, becomes clear. Adjective Slovѣnsk (instead of “normal” * slovsk) suggests that the name of the word ѣ was not formed under the influence of the Latin model on -ani after the word Romani in mixed romance- (pra) Slavic language environment.
From the above, it follows that the name of the “Slavs” was born in the Danube provinces of the Roman Empire in the era of the “3rd century crisis” as the self-designation of the local provincial population expressing in a common language, which was strongly influenced by camp Latin Latin Pannonica lingua. In VI-VIII centuries. the name of the Danube "Slavs" and the peculiarities of their "tribal" language spread to the peripheral pre-Slavic population north of the Carpathians (Veneds I-III and Ants IV-VI centuries) and became generic
self-name of all Slavonic speakers.
Sergey Nazin School № 2000 22/6 The Kantemirovskaya Street, Moscow, 115522, Russia e-mail: sergnasin@yandeх.ru
According to the dominant theories today, the Slavs appeared somewhere to the north from the Carpathian Mountains, in the Vistula-Oder (Rusanova 1976; Sedov 1979; 2002) or
Pripyat-Dnieper region (Tretyakov 1982; Schukin 1997; Gavritukhin 2009) in as carriers of the Prague-type archaeological culture, which in the era
Of the Great Migration settled Eastern Europe and the Balkan peninsula.
The main disadvantage of such concepts is that they bypass the key question for Slavic self-consciousness, namely the conviction of the Slavs themselves in his arrival from the Danube. Attempts to link the "Danube legend" with the activities of St. Ciril and Methodius in the IX. unsubstantiated. The desire to see in her the memory of stay of the Slavs in the VI. on the lower Danube it is contrary to the fact that time years "and a number of other early sources derive the Slavs from the eastern foothills of the Alps, identify them with ancient Norik and Pannonians.
The purpose of this article is to once again critically review the evidence of history and linguistics about the early Slavs and to compare them with the prevailing views in modern science.
Where did the sklavins live?
The Gothic historian Jordanes writes: “The Slavs live from the city of Novietun and the lake, called Mursiansky, to Dunastra, and to the north - to Viskla; instead cities have swamps and forests. Anty is the strongest of both tribes - spread from Dunaster to Dunapra, where the Pontic Sea forms
bend; these rivers are separated from one another by a distance of many passages. ”
(Gettika, 35).
The description of the land of the Slavs is given on four cardinal points. Southern the border, apparently, was the border of the Byzantine Empire along the Danube, the east - r.
Dniester. The northern boundary was the Vistula River in its upper course. This follows from the fact that Jordan describes the Slavs as inhabitants of Scythia (Getika, 33-34), and the river
Wisla, "born in the Sarmatian Mountains, flows into the northern ocean with three arms mind Skandzy, demarcating Germany and Scythia "(Gettika, 17). In the west area
the settlement of the Slavins began "from the Mursian Lake and the city of Novietun" (a civitate Novietunense et laco qui appellatur Mursiano).
Jordanes indicates the position of the Mursinsky Lake when he writes: “Scythia border with the land of Germany down to the place where the river Istres is born and Mursian Lake (stagnus Morsianus) extends ”(Getika, 30). Clarify where “that place” is located, helps the news of “Natural History” by Pliny the Elder.
It says that, starting "in Germany", the Danube is called Istra "as just beginning to wash the shores of Illyria ”(Natural History, IV. 12 (79)). Junior contemporary of Pliny the Elder Tacitus reports that Germany is "separated from the Gauls, Retas and Pannonians by the rivers Rhine and Danube ... they [living in modern Czech markers] as it were, the advanced outpost of Germany, since its border - Danube ”(Germany, 1. 41-42).
We see that the eastern border of Germany on the Danube coincided with natural boundary between the Alpine lands and the Middle Danube lowland, which divides the upper and middle reaches of the Danube in the area of Vienna.
Lake Mursian can only be located on the historic border between “German” Austria and “Scythian” Hungary. Neyzidlersee (Hung. Fertő "swamp"). Prior to the start of reclamation works, this water body exceeded the size of Balaton, as it included the huge Khanshag bog (German: Waasen “swamp”).
The definition of the Mursian Lake at the same time as an “lake” (lacus) and the “standing pond” (stagnum) is explained by its impressive size and extremely small — on average, about a meter — Neusiedlersee depth. Probably, Jordanes called this lake Mursian by the name of the neighboring city Murcella on the Marcal River (Hungarian Marcaly <Mursella). In the place of Murcella lies the modern village of Moritzida (Hung. Mórichida). This name means "bridge across [the river] Muretz." The situation on the historical border of Germany and Hungary, and the neighborhood with a bunch of toponyms and hydronyms on the “Mur” make identification of the Mursian Lake with the modern Neusiedlersee the only possible one. Remoteness from the border with "Germany" and the lack of a real lake in the vicinity makes it absolutely incredible placement of the Mursian Lake on the site of the ancient swamp Hiulca palus near the cities of Murcia (present-day Osijek) and Murcella (present-day Petrievtsi) at the confluence Drava in the Danube (Skrzhinskaya 1957: 6).
The identification of Lake Mursian with Lake Balaton (Skrzhinskaya 1957: 16). Jordanes mentions two lakes: Mursiansky and Pelso (lacum Pelsois; lacum Pelsodis: Getika, 268, 274), the latter clearly located in Pannonia. In the Middle Danube, there are only two reservoirs that deserve the name of the lake (him. See) - Fertё (Neusiedlersee) and Balaton (Plattensee). Obviously, these are the two Jordan lakes, the Mursian and the Pelso, respectively. Any other explanations will look like obvious violence against geography of a well-known ancient region.
As for Novietun, two cities with this name are known in the Danube region (Celt. "New City") - modern Isaccea at the mouth of the Danube and Drnovo at the confluence of the r. Krka in Sava. There are large lakes and estuaries near Isakchi, but since there are no names like Mursa, Mūrsella or Muretsa in those places, identifying them with Mursian Lake will be complete arbitrariness. In addition, the border of Scythia and Germany cannot be placed in the lower Danube, and the usual in such cases reservation about vague geographical representations of the ancients does not help here. The city of Noviodun-Drnovo, on the contrary, fully corresponds to the description of Jordanes. If you look at the map, we will see that the Neusiedlersee – Drnovo line coincides with the natural boundary (300 m above sea level) between the eastern Alps and the Middle Danube lowland (see Fig. 1). This is the western border of the settlement of "sklavins", which in the first half of the 6th century. lived from the Alps in the west to the Dniester in the east and from the upper Vistula in the north to the Byzantine border on the Danube in the south, occupying the entire Carpathian Basin, including the Hungarian Danube (antique Pannonia).
Early localization "Sklavins" in Pannonia confirmed the news of Procopius. About 512 G. fled from the Danube, the Heruls "are sequentially passed through all the Slavic tribes, and then, passing through vast desert region, made up of the so-called warnow. After they went through the tribes of the Danes Here... they came to the ocean, boarded ships, landed on the Isle of Fula and stayed there" (the War with the Goths, II. 15. 2-4).
The Heruls could not come back to Scandinavia through the Slavic lands on the lower Danube and Dniester – for this they would have to give an inexplicable detour around the outer side of the Carpathians. The direct route North through the Moravian gate would have led the Heruli in Silesia. Living here in the beginning of VI century numerous Slavic tribes, which one can "get one another" is impossible: the extreme Western monuments of the early Slavic Prague culture at that time did not go to the West of the Vistula Kazanski 1999: 58) (Fig. 2A).
Fig. 1. The western boundary of the settlement of the Slavins in Jordanes
Most likely, the Heruls didn’t go north immediately after the defeat from Lombards, as can be understood by literally reading Procopius, and after collisions with Gepids and Byzantines in the Sirmium region. The shortest road to the Varnas, which Prokopy most likely refers to as the Saxons by this name, went westward through the completely devastated land “where rugi lived in ancient times”, that is, modern Austria (Czech Rakusy). The geruls were already trying to settle there, but they were forced to go south to the region of Sirmium and Singiduna, fleeing hunger (War of the Goths, II. 14. 24-25). Having crossed from there to the north bank of the Danube, they could get to the Thuringians, who, before their defeat by the Franks in 531, owned Zareinian Germany. The title “The Law of Angles and Varins, Whose are the Thuringes” (Lex Angliorum Werinorum hos est Thuringorum) confirms the entry of Varnas into the ephemeral Thuringian state. The path of the Heruli can be restored as follows: the Sirmium region is the land of the “Sklavins” (Pannonia and East Norik) - a huge desert land left by rugami (Austria) - the land of the Varnas (possession of Thuringian kings) - Danish land (Jutland) (Fig. 2b).
Fig. 2a Borders of settlement of Sclavs and Anti (orange) and the border between Germany and Scythia (green) over Jordanes;
Figure 2b. Possible ways of Heruls to Scandinavia.
Who are the Anti?
We see that Jordan represented the area of settlement of the Slavins in the first half of VI. in the form of a regular geometric figure that occupies all space of the Carpathian basin. If you compare this area with the range early Slavic monuments of Prague culture in the first half of the 6th century. we can easily see that they generally lie outside the distribution of the Jordanian “Sklavins”. This means that the famous Prague culture VI-VII centuries. cannot be identified with the proper “Slavs” (sklavins).
Jordanes writes: “Between these rivers lies Dacia, which, like crowns shield the Alps. On the left of their slope, going down to the north, starting from the birthplace of the Vistula River, a populous tribe of Venets settled on immense spaces. Although their names are now changing according to different genera and localities, they are mostly called claves and antes ”(Getika, 34). It is obvious that the area of the settlement of the Veneti to the east of the Carpathians and the Vistula fully coincides with the early Prague range.
The messages of Jordanes contain a certain contradiction. Insofar as since the Venets are a collection of Sclavins and Anti, then from the “immeasurable spaces” occupied by the Veneti, the share of Sclavins remains a narrow strip of land between the Carpathians and the Dniester. It turns out that the remaining and, moreover, most Venetian region will get living between the Dniester and the Dnieper Anti. At the same time, most of the range of Slavins in the Carpathian Basin (see above) will be located outside the region of the Venets. Thus, in essence, only Anti are turned out to be Venets. The inclusion of Sklavins in their composition is due, firstly, to kinship with the Anti (War of the Goths, III. 14. 26-27, 29), and secondly, the Gothic origin of Jordanes, which (the only one of all modern Byzantine writers!) knew the Germanic name of the Slavs - “Vends”, which used as a generic term. In this regard, I would like to clarify the relationship between the ethnonyms Veneti and Anti. Since the Anti by their name are different from the Sclavins, that is, the "Slavs", the ethnonym Anti is considered non-Slavic by origin and elevates it to the hypothetical name of the Slavs from foreign neighbors (Trubachev 2003: 98). At the same time, it is completely overlooked that the Greek word Ἄνται "Anti" conveyed the Slavic (!) self-name of this people. Obviously, the Antes could not call themselves "Slavs". In this case, the well-known false Hilvudy (an ant in origin) could not express a Slavonic simple thought: "I am an Ant, not a Sklavin." And on the contrary, the Sklavins themselves should have had a special Slavic ethnonym for designating the Anti.
The most complete list of Slavic tribes is contained in the "Tale bigon years". Some names - Slavs, Dregovichi, North - already known from the VI-VII centuries. It is impossible to assume that the Slavic self-name of the Antes, which in the VI. enjoyed half (!) of all Slavs of that time completely disappeared from the Slavic ethnic nomenclature. If the Greek word Σκλάβηνοι reflects the self-name “not, then the Greek Ἄνται must correspond to the name of another chronicle of the tribe.
The Slavic prototype of the ethnonym Ἄνται can be restored on the basis of the name chronicles Vyatichi (vѧtichi, * vęt-itji). The initial Slavic "in" corresponds to the Greek aspiration (psilia): glory. * vers "veres (k)" - Greek ἐρείκη. In the same way, the initial sound of v- in the name of the Adriatic Venets was transmitted in Greek: Veneti> Ἐνετοί (Herodotus, I. 196), Ἐνετικοί (Konstantin Bagryanonny, 27. (38)). Nasal sound * ę (ѧ) in the Slavic language in the VI. was not yet (Shevelov 1964: 328, Anikin, Ivanov 2014: 254). It developed later from the syllable * en, which was naturally transmitted by the Greek αν: lat. сalendae> grech. καλάνδαι. The Greek -αι and Latin - es passed to the early Slavic ending of the plural. Its appearance can be restored on the basis of Lithuanian toponyms in the plural form Trakai / Polish. Troki and lit. Šlovėnai / dr. Rus. in other words (here the chronicle term “inhabitants of Gotland”). Thus, the self ants in the VI. can be reconstructed in as * ventai / * ventoi. Phonetic processes VII-IX centuries. led to the fact that the word has become difficult to pronounce * vętě / * vęti, which led to the appearance of the suffixed variant "Vyatichi".
There is no doubt that the name Vyatichi goes back to the name mentioned in the monuments of I-II centuries. Eastern European Wends (Anikin, Ivanov 2014: 254). The fact that earlier non-Slavic tribes in Italy and Gaul are called Venetians does not have anything to do with the ethnicity of the Slavic Venets. The ethnonym Γερμάνιοι was first mentioned by Herodot in the 5th century. BC. in the list of Persian tribes (Herodotus, I. 125). Plinius the Elder calls the Iberian tribe of the Oretans Germans (Oretani qui et Germani vocantur) (Natural History, III. 29). It would not occur to anyone on the basis of these examples to question the linguistic affiliation of the Germans Caesar and Tacitus.
Building the name of the Anti to the Indo-Iranian root * ant- “end, border”, from which the name “Ukraine” allegedly originated (Basmer I: 376) is an obvious misunderstanding. The hypothetical * ant- "Anti" can really be conveyed by the Greek Ἄνται - the trouble is that the Anti were not Greeks, but Slavs. On Slavic soil, the syllable * an could turn only into the nasal * ǫ (ѫ) “us big”. Such an etymology could be considered only if there is a chronicle of the tribe "(c) uchi" (* ǫtitji). The full identity of the Veneti and the Ants can be confirmed with the news of the defeat of the Ants by the Gothic King Vinitar at some point in the end of the 4th c. (Gettika, 245-246). The word "Vinitarium" is the usual Germanic ethnonym in -ari, like vidyvaria (Getika, 36) or bauvariya (bavar). A similar name Vandalaria, that is, "vandal" wore the grandfather of Theodoric the Great. Obviously, the nickname Vinitarium simply means “Venet” and, let us recall domestic “Afghan warriors”, was given by the ethnic name of the enemies, in the battles with which this king became famous.
Since he fought the Anti, we can conclude that Goths IV c. called them "Vinitaria." Thus, the ants IV - early VII centuries. It should be considered the direct descendants of Eastern European Veneds of the I-III centuries, the Slavic self-name of which survived to historical time in the name of the chroniclers of the Vyatichi. So, if the continuity between Wends and Anti is not subject to doubt, then the question of the identity of the Veneti and the "Sklavins" must be given a uniquely negative answer. Slaves and venets / antes are two different, albeit related peoples. The first in the mass occupied the inner part of the Carpathian depression up to the eastern foothills of the Alps, the second - the land stretching to the northeast from the Carpathians.
What is the pre-Slavic language?
Proto-Slavic or pan-Slavic was a language with an open syllable, in which all the words ended in a vowel, which reflected the pre-revolutionary Russian spelling with the sign "ъ." This is the fundamental difference.
Proto-Slavic language from the Baltic, which preserved the ancient state of the language with a closed syllable: lit. Vilnius and Rus. Vilna the tendency to open syllable is alien to the Indo-European structure of speech, the only exception was the Proto-Romanian language, in which Latin closed syllables fell: Latin. lupus> ital. lupo, isp. lobo, etc.
This circumstance, as well as the complete coincidence of the Pro-Slavic and Pra-Romanesque phonetics and a number of other striking convergences indicate that Pre-Slavic language was formed due to the strongest influence of folk Latin on the archaic Indo-European dialect of the Slav ancestors (Ivanov 1989: 26). The Germanic languages, despite the millennial neighborhood with the Latin language, did not experience anything of the kind, from which it follows that the Proto-Slavic language could become the language of an open syllable only under the conditions of Roman Slavic bilingualism in the Roman Empire.
Where and when could this interaction take place? Traditionally his by the time of the migration of the Slavs to the Balkan Peninsula, where they faced with the Eastern Romance population - the ancestors of the modern Romanians. Stories are known examples of a complete change in the initial language system under the influence of a more powerful and developed language. So Anglo-Saxon turned into modern English under the influence of French in a very short period of time from 1066 to the end of the XV century. (Middle English period).
Unlike the Anglo-Saxons, the Slavs came to the Balkans as conquerors. The local Vlach and Albanian populations were pushed into the mountains and the first references to it appeared only in the sources of the X-XI centuries. The Romanian language experienced the strongest impact of the Slavic language: a huge layer of vocabulary was borrowed (41% of A. Chikhaki’s dictionary, 1879), including the most frequent word in the spoken word “yes”. Slavic origin has the main part of the social and agricultural terminology of the Romanian language, the original Latin vocabulary is almost completely supplanted from the description of the most important emotional and psychological qualities of a person. Only the Romanian pastoral vocabulary and words relating mainly to the “biological” side of human life activity are unique. Under the influence of the Slavic, the syntax, phonetics and morphology of the Romanian language also significantly changed.
Under these conditions, the opposite and most important, the simultaneous impact of the Romanlanguage into Slavic, turned it into a language with open syllables, is unlikely. For example, the influence of the Anglo-Norman language on the Anglo-Saxon language, comparable to the influence of the Slavic language on the Romanian, was emphasized one-sided. The same can be assumed in the case of the Slavs and Romanians. Slavonic could not experience the strongest Romanesque influence due to the “cultural” superiority of the autochthonous Romanesque population over the Slavic conquerors, since the Roman cities in the Balkans were destroyed with the arrival of the Slavs, the “cultural” layer of the population died or fled, and the remaining population retreated to the mountains. The Slavs who occupied the best lands in the valleys of the Balkan Peninsula (dominated by Slavonic toponymy and hydronymy) had no reason to learn the language of Albanian and “Vlachian” pastoralists, as the Anglo-Saxons had not, push aside Vlachs (wealh, Welsh) of Britain in the barren mountains of Wales and Scotland.
The influence of the Romance language on the Slavic, which led to the transformation his language with an open syllable took place in the conditions of Slavic-Romanesque
bilingualism. This interaction was supposed to occur at full the predominance of Romanesque speech and the Romanesque population over the Slavs. In the VI-VII centuries. this was impossible, but the ethnic memory of the Slavs retained a very definite idea of the domination of the “Volokhs”, which in fact was considered the beginning of its history: “Volokh bo found on the Slovenes on the Danube, and is the oldest in them and forces them” (Tale 1950: 11).
This event can not be timed to the wars of the Slavs and Byzantines in the lower Danube (Machinsky 1981: 12), since this confrontation ended in victory Slavs, nor to the defeat of the Avars Kaganate by the Franks (Petrukhin 1996), since the invasion of the Volokhs in the annals takes place before the arrival of the Obar “Avar”. Therefore, the chronicle story of the Volokh invasion of the Danube Slavs should be considered a description of the Roman conquest and domination (“the most seducing and forcing them”) on the Middle Danube.
From the foregoing it follows that having been under the strongest influence Late Latin, the formation of Slavic as a language with an open syllable couldoccur only on the territory of the Roman provinces in the Middle Danube before the beginning of the great migration of peoples.
What does the name "Slavs" mean?
The connection of the name * slověne "Slavs" with the "Slovo" "word" is intuitive. Doubts according to which the suffix -ѣne / -yane usually serves to form place names should not be taken into account. On the Slavic soil, where the Polians model is Polish, the Drevlyans are Derevo wooden, the Volzhans are Volga, a natural “Slavs” would be expected to be “Slavic”. That is why the name of the Slavs can not be compared with the name of the Lithuanian village Shlavenai (Šlavėnai) on the river. Šlavė and deduce from the name of a certain river (Vasmer III: 666; Schramm 1997: 71-73). “Slavs” is not a geographical name.
It is almost generally accepted that in the name of "Slavs", that is, "speaking", Slavs they separated themselves from the "mute" neighbors who did not understand the Slavic language. Hence the ethnonym "Nemets" "mute" (Fasmer III: 62). But the word “Nemets” never had such an “all-encompassing” meaning. The Slavs designated by this name only the western neighbors - the Germans - and even then not all. Constantine Bagryanorodnyy calls Bavars only “Nemets” (Νεμίτζιοι) (On Ceremonies, II, 48). Hungarians, who borrowed the ethnonym német from the Slavs, called it so only the inhabitants of southern Germany (Latin teutones), who spoke High German. The carriers of the Low German dialects were called “Saxons” (szász / saxones), while both “nations” could live within the same of the same city (Vinogradov, Melnikova, Shusharin 1989: 149).
Thus, the “Nemets” was originally not the designation of all “non-Slavs”, but a narrow-tribe name, which can be clearly seen from the chronicle list. “Afetovo bo and that knee: Varanasians, Svei, Urman, Goth, Russia, Agnes, Galicans, Volykhva, Romans, Nmtsi, Korlyazi, Venѣditsi, Fryagov and others, too, from west to midday and come down to eat with my hamovs, and descend to our hams, and from time to time from west to noon and come together for a family of hams, and descend to be in a family of hams and descend from west to mid-afternoon and come together to eat with our hams. 1950: 10). The word "Nemets" is difficult to consider the original Slavic because of the "strange" stress. It is obvious to anyone who speaks Russian that a "слепой" “blind man” cannot be a "слéпцем", a «глупый» – «глýпцем»“stupid”, a «хромой» – «хрóмцем» "lame". The origin of the ethnonym “Nemets” from the Slavic word "nemoi" “mute” is therefore completely excluded. It should be considered as borrowing from the Celtic languages (AA Shakhmatov by: Fasmer III: 62), where nemed means a free full member of a tribe, admitted to a tribal cult, sent by druids (literally "woody") in sacred groves (Greek νέμος "forest", lat. nemus, -oris "grove") (Simone 1984; Shkunayev 1989: 45, 48-49). From here comes the names of one of the waves of the conquerors of Ireland - “the people of Nemed” and the Gallic tribe of Nemetes near modern Speyer (Noviomagus Nemetum).
If the opposition of "talking" Slavs and "mute" Germans turned out to be imaginary, then how to explain the appearance of the name with the meaning "speaking understandable"? An ethnonym with such a meaning is completely unusual, since it refers to the opposition of people and animals (the speakers are wordless), while the archaic ethnic names have the meaning of “real” and not “speaking” person ”(Nikonov: 15).
In Europe, there are only three peoples whose self-name means “people who speak a clear language”: these are Slavs, Albanians (shqiptarët) and Basques (euskaldunak). The typology of these names, which became known relatively late, suggests the same reason for their appearance. It lies on the surface. Albanians and Basques are linguistic relics - remnants of the autochthonous population of the Balkan and Iberian Peninsula, which miraculously escaped Romanization. Therefore, the ethnonyms euskaldunak and shqiptarët could arise only in the conditions of hostile coexistence of the Romans and the natives within the borders of the Roman Empire.
In later times, the opposition of the Romanesque and the unromanized population of the provinces would have no meaning. It is impossible to refer the occurrence of self-names of Albanians and Basques to even later time. In medieval Spain, the originality of the Basques was protected by special privileges (fueros). The consequence of Turkish domination could be Islamization of the Albanians, but in the “baptismal state” there was nothing like the processes of language assimilation that took place in the Roman Empire.
It has already been said that Slavic, as the language of an open syllable, could develop only in the context of Roman-Pra-Slavic bilingualism. Sense Identity
the self-designation of the Slavs, Albanians and Basques confirms that the ethnonym * slověne arose among the provincial population of the Roman Empire, who, by virtue of some
Reasons managed to keep their language.
Where was the Slavic ethnic center?
The statement that the “Slavs” originated in the Roman Empire looks like a paradox, but in fact it is not. Usually Slavic ethnogenesis is as follows. Toward the middle of the 1st millennium AD in a limited area to the north of the Carpathians appears Prague archaeological culture, the carriers of which were the first Slavs. Then, for a number of reasons, the Slavic population begins to grow dramatically, expand its territory and number, including through the mass assimilation of the foreign-speaking population. The overgrown Slavic community is divided into separate nations, and the name of the Slavs It remains as a local self-name only on the periphery, where the Slavic population comes into contact with the foreign.
This "biblical" picture of the multiplied "like sand of the sea" Slavs has little to do with the actual ethnogenetic processes that take place in exactly the opposite way. First, a certain community arises that differs from its kindred language by its name, for example, “Romans” or “Turks”. Then this community establishes dominance (or primacy) within its own linguistic environment, assimilation of a foreign language population is possible, but does not play a special role. The new name is assimilated by kindred tribes as a generic, but continues to exist as a “local” or the “tribal” name of the original collective, which becomes the center of the ethnic community formed. The death of this center is equivalent to the arrest of the human heart and leads to an irreversible disintegration of ethnic unity and the beginning of a new ethnogenetic process.
The ethnogenesis of the ancient Russian people can be considered a classic example. At the end of the ninth century. "Russian" Prince Oleg at the head of the unification of a number of northern tribes occupies Kiev - the main city in the "Polish land". The change of dynasty and the arrival of numerous newcomers contribute to the assimilation of self-names by the Polians "Russian". Based on the population of the "Russian land" (in fact, on the field), the Russian princes are subjugated by other Slavic tribes. In the XI-XII centuries. tribes give way places to urban lands, but the opposition of the “Russian land” in the Dnieper region and the “Russian” people inhabiting it to the Russian population of other lands is fully preserved. Despite the constant strife, "Rus" retains its value as the center of Russia - any significant Prince wants to have a city there. The reason for the collapse of the (ancient) Russian ethnos was not the notorious “fragmentation”, but the death of the “Russian land” in the Dnieper region literally erased by the Tatars from the face of the earth.
If we approach the question of the origin of the Slavs from this point of view, we will see that the ethnic center of the Slavs is in the western part of the Middle East.The Danube River is there, from where the Tale of Bygone Years brings the Slavs. It is here that Slavic peoples live, using the name of "Slavs" as self-designation: Slovenes, Slovaks and Croats of the Kaykava dialect.
It is erroneous to assert that the ethnonym "Slavs" has been preserved on the periphery of Slavism, in the neighborhood or in the environment of a foreign-speaking population. The Lausitz Serbs, the most characteristic people in this respect, have never used the Slavs self-name as a “tribal” self-name. With another hand, all the Danube "Slavs", like the Russians, Ukrainians and Belarusians, became independent peoples relatively recently.
Today the Kaykava dialect is much closer to the Slovenian language than to the Croatian literary language that has developed on the basis of the Stockvian dialect.
The central Slovak dialect is sharply separated from the western and eastern Slovak dialect, like all Western Slavic languages in general, with its own “Yugoslav Slavonic” peculiarities, bringing him primarily to the Slovenian and Kaikawa (Smirnov 1989: 247).
In the Middle Ages, the Hungarians did not make a difference between the Slavs of the Middle Danube using the name "Slavs" as the self-name. They called Slovaks, Slovenes and the Kaykava population of Slavonia one and the same word tót (h), which corresponded to the Latin sclavus. Other Slavs were known to Hungarians under their own names: orosz “Russian”, lengyel “Polish”, cseh “Czech”, marót “Moravec”, horvát “Croatian”, bolgár “Bulgarians”, rác “Serb”. The Hungarians never confused them with the “Slavs” and did not call them the word tót (h). On the other hand, the ethnonym "tots" was never used to designate "Slavs in general" (Shusharin 1997: 230).
The evidence of the archaic Hungarian ethnonymy about the existence of a special people of "Slavs" is confirmed by the "Tale of Bygone Years". "Be one language
Slovѣnska: [1] slovѣne, ilk sѣdyaha according to Dunaevi, their priyash eels, [2] and morava, [3] and chesi, [4] and lyakhov, [5] and the glade, nowadays Rus'. Obviously, “the words, ilk sѣdyahu according to Dunaevi” are the very Hungarian “tots” (“their priyasha eels”) - the ancestors of the Slovaks, Slovenes and Slavonians, who on the eve of the Hungarian invasion represented a single people with a special dialect (Chelim 1988) .
The origin of the Hungarian ethnonym tót (h) (plural h. Tót (h) ok) "(Danube) Slavs" is most plausibly explained from the Turkic tat, which the nomads called the conquered agricultural population (Shusharin 1997: 262).
The attitude of the "Turks" (as the Byzantines called Hungarians) to "tats" was reflected in the sayings tatsiz Turk Bulmaz, Bashiz Burk Bulmaz "there is no Turk without tat, no cap
without a head "(Türk.) and a kasa nem etel, a tot nem ember" porridge is not food, that (ie, Slav) is not a person "(Hungarian).
So, the chronicle "land of Slovka" on the middle Danube had for the Slavic world the same meaning as the "Russian land" in the Dnieper region for the rest of Russia. It was from here that Slavic self-consciousness spread to peripheral Slavic tribes: Poles, fields, Vyatichi, etc. This process should not be confused with the resettlement of "Slavs in general", although the resettlement of the "Slavs" proper from the Danube also took place - we are talking about Pomorians and Ilmenes Slovens.
Important cultural and linguistic impulses emanated from the Middle Danube region (Kurkina 1993: 38; Trubachev 2003: 85), which ensured the unity of the Slavs at the time of St.. Cyril and Methodius. The Hungarian conquest led to the death of the “Slavic land” on the Danube. The best part of it - the Hungarian Danube - was inhabited by the Hungarians, and the actual “Slavic” population was preserved only in the Alps, Tatras and between the rivers Sava and Drava. There it turned into Slovaks, Slovenes and Croatians-Kaykavts (Slavonic). The death of the Slavic ethnic nucleus led to the disintegration of the Slavs in the southern, western and eastern.
From whom do the “Slavs” come?
In order to better understand the mechanism of the emergence of "Slavs", one should once again list the conclusions made above. "Slavs" (sklavinami) in the VI. only that part of the then Slavs was named, which inhabited the Carpathian Basin. Proto-Slavic language with open syllables was formed under the strong influence of late Latin on the territory of the Roman Empire even before the Slavs migrated to the Balkans. The ethnonym "Slavs" could appear only among the provincial unromanized population. Ethnic center
Slavs, where they lived actually "Slavs", was the western part of the Middle Danube region - the land of the Roman provinces of Pannonia and Norik (eastern). These conclusions
fully confirm the authenticity of the early Slavic tradition about the Danube ancestral homeland of the Slavs.
Of course, this tradition cannot be regarded as originally “pan-Slavic”. The Danube legend relates only to the Sklavins, not the Venets (Ants), only to the Danube “Slavs”, and not the Poles or Vyatchians. The latter were not Danube natives, and their own traditions remained to us unknown. Therefore, I would like to draw the reader’s attention to the fact that all of the following applies only to the ancestors of Slovaks, Slovenes and Croats Kaikavians (as well as Ilmen words and Pomors Slovinians).
The presence of the Slavic autochthonous population, which significantly prevailed over other ethnic elements on the Middle Danube, can based on the news of Priska Paninsky, who visited Attila’s bid in the middle of the 5th century, long before the first mention of the name of the Slavs. Priscus calls Attila’s subjects are Scythians and reports that “in representing a mixed tribe, Scythians, apart from their barbaric language, can easily learn Gunish or Gothic, as well as Avsonian, if any of them have intercourse with the Romans, but few of them speak Hellenic besides the captives taken away from Thrace and the Illyrian coast ”(Code I: 87). Prisk opposes "Scythians" and "Goths" and uses the name "Royal Scythians" as a synonym for the word "Huns", and reports that the latter do not engage in agriculture (Prisk, 1, 14.39).
It is obvious that, in addition to the "royal Scythians", there were Scythians "non-royal", who, unlike the former, were dependent farmers, that is, "tatami" of the Huns (Set I: 87) These were the “mixed
Scythians "(literally ζύγκλιδες" washed up by the waves "(Code I: 94)), who spoke in" their barbarous language "different from Hun, Gothic, Latin (Avson) and
Greek The native words strava, μέδος, κάμον, Tisia with transparent Slavic etymologies make it possible to judge the nature of this language (Gindin 1981).
Name p. Tisza, which in ancient times was known exclusively as Patiscus (Pathiscus, Πάθισο вообще) in general, could only arise on Slavic soil, where
The name Patisse, perceived as "Potie," was transformed into Tisa (Gindin 1981: 64-66). Needless to say, the name of the largest tributary of the Danube in the Slavic form could not come into use already in the middle of the 5th century, if the Slavic population were not accounted for the vast majority in the state of Attila.
Slavic "mixed Scythians" who lived in the Middle Danube were direct descendants of the provincial population of the Roman province of Pannonia. This allows you to judge the name of the drink from the barley, which they treated the Priscus servants. The word κάμον or camum was a drink like the Egyptian ziton or Celtic Kervisia, that is, beer (κερβησία, cervesa) (Code I: 94).
Tacitus reports that the wasp tribe living in Germany spoke Pannonian, which was different from both Germanic and Celtic (Cotinos Gallica, Osos Pannonica lingua coarguit non esse Germanos) (Germany, 43). Tacitus also reports that the wasps were a branch of the Pannonian tribe of the Euravisks (Sed utrum Aravisci in Pannonia ab Osis, Germanorum natione, an Osi ab Araviscis in Germania commigraverint, cum eodem adhuc sermone institutis moribus utantur, incertum) (Germany, Germany) (Germany, Germany), Germany, Germany, Germany, Germany (Germany), Germany, ethereutis moribus utantur, inertum (Germany) (Germany)
The only thing that can be said about the Pannonian language is that it was Indo-European (Tokhtasiev 1998: 30). The toponymy and material culture of Pannonia differ from those in the western part of the Balkan Peninsula, from which it can be concluded that the Pannonians and Illyrians were different in language and origin of nations (Praistoria V: 755). The following examples point to the extreme proximity of the Pannonian and Proto-Slavic languages.
First, the name of the Pannon beer κάμον or camum is reliably explained only from the praslav. * Kom "com", from where Serb. Kommina "grape pomace" and kȍminjak "grape moonshine" (Code I: 92; Essy X: 173, 179). Secondly, we are talking about the names of the lake Pelso “reach”, the Oseriates “lake” tribe and the Bustricius “Bistrica” river in Pannonia, as well as the name of the god in the inscription from Intercis in Pannony DoBRATI. EUTICER. SER (vus). DE (dit) “Evtikhiy the slave consecrated to God the Shame” (Trubachev 2003: 109). Thirdly, the names of the tribes living in Pannonia Eravisks, Tauris and Skordisks end with the characteristic suffix -sk-, which is represented in the Baltic, Germanic and Slavic languages, but is completely absent in the Celtic and in the Illyrian ethnonymy of the western part Balkan (Porzig 2003: 297). Fourthly, the leader of the Pannonnian uprising against Rome (6-9 years) Baton (Batho, - nis) bore the same name as the Slavic prince of the XI century. Konstantin Bodin (Βοδίνῳ at Skylitsa; Βοδίνου at Anna Komnina).
About the stay of the linguistic ancestors of the Slavs in Pannonia at the end of the 1st millennium BC This is evidenced by the fact that the Slavic language shares with the language of the Adriatic Veneti an important lexical innovation - the word "young." In other Indo-European languages (with the exception of Prussian), this word retained the original Indo-European meaning "soft, gentle." The Venetian inscriptions contain personal names corresponding to the Yugoslavian Mladen, Mladenka (Porzig 2003: 221). This should also include the Venetian Tergeste, Lat. Tergestum (Trieste) etymologically close pier. * tъržišče "Torzhische".
Thus, it is safe to say that the chronicles of the “words of the Danube”, they are also the Hungarian “tots” (tót (h) ok, Sclavi) - the ancestors of modern Slovaks, Slovenes and Croatian Kaikavians - are direct descendants of the ancient Pannonians.
How and when did the ethnonym "Slavs" appear?
Since the name of the Slavs could not have appeared before the Roman conquest of the Danube, we cannot mechanically identify Pannonians of the 1st and 2nd centuries. with
native speakers * slověne. The Slavs, like the Albanians and the Basques, are a new growth irreducible to the ancient tribes. Such a new community really develops in the Roman provinces on the Danube - we are talking about the so-called "Illyricians".
C III. ne "The army of the Illyricians" (exercitus Illyricianum) began to be called the Roman troops on the Danube. Since the time of Adrian (117-138), they settled in permanent camps, and during the rule of Septimius Severus (193-212) their personnel, recruited from the local non-Romanized population, finally lost the original Italian (i.e. Roman) character (Bannikov 2013: 60, 64). In 235, the “Illyricians”, who served as the main support of the Northern dynasty, killed its last representative, Alexander, and erected on their imperial throne henchman - the first "soldier emperor" Maximin Thracian. This event was evidence of the final formation of a new ethnic community, opposed to the "Romans". This is also indicated by the coins of the soldier emperors with the provocative legend GENIVS EXERC (itus) ILLVRICIANI “the genius of the Illyrian army” instead of the usual GENIUS POPULI ROMANI “the genius of the Roman people”.
The early Slavic borrowings from Latin have as their source the language of the Roman military camp: * ščitъ - scutum "shield", * kladivo - gladius "sword", * sekyra - sekuris "ax", * trǫba - tromba "war pipe", * kъmětъ - соmes , * kalika - caliga "soldier's boot", * kostr - castrum "military camp", * val - - vallum "palisade", * kobyla - caballus "paddle (cavalry) horse", * vьlbǫd ъ - elephans (-ntis) "(combat ) elephant ", * golǫb - сolumbus" (postal) pigeon ". The source of these borrowings was soldier Latin no later than the 3rd century, since
In the following centuries, the gladiator sword fell out of use and was replaced by spata, and the word columbus was completely suppressed from the Latin word palumbus - palomba "dove".
The Roman army on the Danube border was made up of very different ethnic elements, but it was the Pannonians who formed the basis and it is not surprising that it was their language - Pannonica lingua - and not Latin that became the language of the military camp of the Danube provinces. Stories are well known examples of this kind. The language of communication of the Great Mogul army was the language "Urdu" - literally "military", "camp", which was formed on the basis of indigenous people of india. In Portuguese Brazil until the end of the XVIII century. The language of communication was the so-called língua geral paulista, which was formed on the basis of the Guaraní language, which was spoken by Banderanta soldiers from São Paulo.
Probably, the name "Slavs" was originally a tribal designation of the entire provincial population of the Danube, using the military "word", and then, in the era of open struggle of Illyria and Italy in the era of the "III century crisis," became ethnic self-designation. Proto-Slavic ethnonyms * slověne and * volsi (sg. * volxá) will then correspond to the Latin Illyricianes and Romani. In this connection, the combination of Slavs - Slavic, impossible in Slavic, but fully corresponding to borrowed Christians - Christian, Armenians - Armenian, Samaritan - Samaritan, becomes clear. Adjective Slovѣnsk (instead of “normal” * slovsk) suggests that the name of the word ѣ was not formed under the influence of the Latin model on -ani after the word Romani in mixed romance- (pra) Slavic language environment.
From the above, it follows that the name of the “Slavs” was born in the Danube provinces of the Roman Empire in the era of the “3rd century crisis” as the self-designation of the local provincial population expressing in a common language, which was strongly influenced by camp Latin Latin Pannonica lingua. In VI-VIII centuries. the name of the Danube "Slavs" and the peculiarities of their "tribal" language spread to the peripheral pre-Slavic population north of the Carpathians (Veneds I-III and Ants IV-VI centuries) and became generic
self-name of all Slavonic speakers.
Last edited:
That's why I ask my first question again, again and again - what do you believe be a difference between Slavs and non-Slavs (for example, balts)?
Yes. And if it's main disadvantage of this version, well, version is solid.
...you do understand this article proclaims organized big and organized slavic settlements on Balkans somewhere in Trayan's time?
They went around because the passages to the Carpathians were occupied by Gepids, and the Turks pursued from behind.
They can be traced archaeologically in the footsteps of the carriers of the Danube tradition. For Ukraine, Slavicization was in 8-10 centuries AD. In fact, the Ants did not recover after the victory of the Avars and disappeared.
Nazin is a student of Trubachev. His book, published only 300 copies is bibliographic rarity, is impossible to get it.
Last edited:
]Look at the map of slavic tribes you provided yourself - Avars could go around Carpathians never leaving Slavic lands. If you don't believe this map to be accurate - why post it?
I can't get it. Why do you post maps and works that believes Penkova culture (VI-VIII centuries) is slavic then?
It's possible, but did you read the article you linked?
The map is accurate, but they are not Slavs
Once again I say that the Ants were destroyed by the Avars and could not be the ancestors of the Slavs.
Of course. Nazin distinguishes between the Slavs in general (Paraslavs) and the Slavs themselves in Pannonia. Slavic was formed in Pannonia in the context of bilingualism.
I do not see the conditions for the Slavic language to develop in Ukraine. Trajanus did not seem to conquer Ukraine. Roman legions were not in Ukraine.
The population of Ukraine has undergone a total destruction twice:
1) During the invasion of the Bastarnians. 3 century BC. Then the Neuvrs were destroyed, burned.
2) During the invasion of Avars. 5th century AD. Then the Ants were destroyed, burned.
The Goths invasion did not lead to total genocide, surprisingly.
1) During the invasion of the Bastarnians. 3 century BC. Then the Neuvrs were destroyed, burned.
2) During the invasion of Avars. 5th century AD. Then the Ants were destroyed, burned.
The Goths invasion did not lead to total genocide, surprisingly.
And that's why?.. What formal criteria they don't met?
First of all: Antes, by common tradition, aren't ancestors of Slavs, but one of Slavic (or protoslavic, as I believe Slavic ethnogenesis was finished in 7th century) tribes.
But secondly, how do you imagine complete genocide of every tribal village in 6th century tech level (and why somebody would do something like this)? Antes definitely were destroyed as a tribal union. Still, you already presented cases of surviving peoples after conquests.
So, what are we talking about? "Slavs in general" or one Slavic tribe with disputable placement?
Nazin, as far as I can tell, speaking about "when Slavs started to be called Slavs". That's interesting question, truly, but this name is definitely later then ethnogenesis.
Yes, that's the problem roman hypothesis - because Slavic language shows Iranian substrate, Celtic substrate and Germanic substrate.
Actually, the best place for this is 2nd century Ukraine - southern borders of Gothic state.
You should distinguish protoslavic and common Slavic. The key difference -- the law of the open syllables. There were ONLY two European languagas where this law run: Соmmon Romance and Common Slavic. The protoslavic (close relative to the Baltic language) could turn in the Common Slavic only under the Romance influence. I can explain my article, because I am an autor, me name is Sergey Nazin.
Oh, Sergey himself.
I assumed that the Slavs originated in Pannonia. How do Proto-slavs differ from the Balts? Toponymy of Eastern Europe is Baltic. Moscow (Moskva) is a wet, swampy place from Lithuanian, in Slavic it sounds completely different. Also the rivers Nepryadva, Neva. Even Lithuania (Letuva) itself
Last edited:
Ther are two following stage of Slavic language. The first may be called "Balto-Slavic" (I think it is not a single language but a language unit). This Slavic №1 had strоng influense from the Iranian -- the name оf the God has iranian origin (russ. БОГ / bog) in the Slavic while the Balts keep an old name DIEVAS (lat. Deus). Вut this protoslavic language was not the ansector оf the modern Slavic languges as the Classic Latin was not ansector оf the Romance languages. In both case we have intermediate language: Соmmon Slavic (Slavic №2) and Common Romance (Vulgar Latin, Latin №2). Воth language have common features: OPEN SYLLABLE and PALATALISATION. For example: latin class. AU-RIS -- romance AU-RI-CU-LA -french aureille "ear" and Slavic №1 *SUNUS (lituanian SUNUS too) -- Common Slavic *Sū-nu / *SY-NЪ-- polish SYN) -- opan syllables. The latin CAESAR (>germ. Kaiser) -- roman. CE-SA-RE -- italian Сesare ("Chezare"). It is the key difference between the Slavic and the Baltic. The capital of Lituania VIL-NIUS (closed syllables) and old Russian ВИ-ЛЬ-НО / VI-LI-NO (open syllables), lituanian KAINA "price" (non palatazed K) and russian ЦЕНА (TSENA) -- palatalisation *K > *C (TS).
Russian chronic (The Tale of Bygone Years) tells that the Slavs is the same as the Norici (roman province Noricum) amd the prime land of the Slavs was roman Illyricum. All modern historian think that this genealogy was falsificated by the monk-chronist Nestorius, but I assume that this REAREST coincidence between the Common Romance and the Common Slavic fits the Nestor's tale and the Common Slavic was born in Pannonia and East Noricum under strong influencre оf the Vulgar Latin upon the "Slavic №1" (Quite as the English was born from the Anglo-Saхоn under strongest influence оf the old French). It's the rearest coinsidence because the nearest OPEN SYLLADLE languages are Jananees (NA-GA-SA-KI etc.), poliynesian (GO-NO-LU-LU etc/) and Bantu languages (LI-MPO-PO, ZA-MBE-ZI, MO-BU-TU SE-SE-SE-KO etc). Such languae evolution can not have place in any place northwards of Carpatian mountains where the archeologist put the homeland of the Slavs!
Russian chronic (The Tale of Bygone Years) tells that the Slavs is the same as the Norici (roman province Noricum) amd the prime land of the Slavs was roman Illyricum. All modern historian think that this genealogy was falsificated by the monk-chronist Nestorius, but I assume that this REAREST coincidence between the Common Romance and the Common Slavic fits the Nestor's tale and the Common Slavic was born in Pannonia and East Noricum under strong influencre оf the Vulgar Latin upon the "Slavic №1" (Quite as the English was born from the Anglo-Saхоn under strongest influence оf the old French). It's the rearest coinsidence because the nearest OPEN SYLLADLE languages are Jananees (NA-GA-SA-KI etc.), poliynesian (GO-NO-LU-LU etc/) and Bantu languages (LI-MPO-PO, ZA-MBE-ZI, MO-BU-TU SE-SE-SE-KO etc). Such languae evolution can not have place in any place northwards of Carpatian mountains where the archeologist put the homeland of the Slavs!
This part is so 19th century.
Nowadays it is assumed that those supposed multiple Slavic borrowings from Iranian (and Germanic) are instead shared retentions. Proto Indo-Europeans had multiple terms for several concepts owing to a large number of taboos and using different names depending on specific use.
Slavs almost certainly didn't come from Noricum or Panonia. Just like in the case of Goths and Lombards, the migration tradition, even if true and not entirely fictional, represents the collective memory of a few ruling clans.
Slavs almost certainly didn't come from Noricum or Panonia. Just like in the case of Goths and Lombards, the migration tradition, even if true and not entirely fictional, represents the collective memory of a few ruling clans.[/QUOTE]
I never mind that ALL the Slavs came from the Noricum and Pannonia. It concerns only the "core Slavs", Slavs in sensu stricto: ansectors of the Slovenians, Slovaks, pomeranian Slowincу and Russians of the Northrussian dialect (former Slovene / Cловене), who sreaks sond G hard (as the Polens). South Russians, Ukrainians and Bielorussian speak it mild (as the Bogemians and the Slovaks).
I never mind that ALL the Slavs came from the Noricum and Pannonia. It concerns only the "core Slavs", Slavs in sensu stricto: ansectors of the Slovenians, Slovaks, pomeranian Slowincу and Russians of the Northrussian dialect (former Slovene / Cловене), who sreaks sond G hard (as the Polens). South Russians, Ukrainians and Bielorussian speak it mild (as the Bogemians and the Slovaks).
There's no such thing like "core Slavs". All those ethnic groups that use "Slav" in their names have one thing in common. All of them lived for centuries surrounded by non-Slavic neighbours, and more often than not they were ruled by said neighbours.